To have and hold?

WorD pointed me to an article by slacktivist regarding an extraordinary pronouncement by an apparently famous USian pastor, Ted Haggard (president of the US National Association of Evangelicals), to wit:

They’re pro-free markets, they’re pro-private property…That’s what evangelical stands for.

[Update: The article from which this quotation comes is here.

Now, this is a staggering statement for a Christian to make, and slacktivist does a fine job of setting this against the witness of the Bible and the early church. In particular, the concept that possessing an excess of goods is simply theft from the poor is an interesting one that we don’t hear too often these days. However, slacktivist did miss one point when he suggests that this viewpoint died out in Christianity after about the 4th century, because it’s one that keeps recurring as people rediscover the radical message of Jesus.

I do have a problem with Poverty – I am rich (living in the UK and having a computer means that I’m pretty much rich by default) and yet follow a religion that calls me to poverty in at least some sense. In particular, I’m a Companion of the Society of St Francis and Francis is about nothing if he’s not about poverty (and he managed to reform the church of the 13th century). Those of us who aren’t called to a religious vocation can try to follow the rule of simplicity but it’s hard, perhaps especially these days (or so it seems). And yet we are challenged by these words from the saints (shamelessly taken from slacktivist’s article).

Therefore all things are common; and let not the rich claim more than the rest. To say therefore ‘I have more than I need, why not enjoy?’ is neither human nor proper. (St Clement of Alexandria)

If one who takes the clothing off another is a thief, why give any other name to one who can clothe the naked and refuses to do so? The bread that you withhold belongs to the poor; the cape that you hide in your chest belongs to the naked; the shoes rotting in your house belong to those who must go unshod.(St Basil)

When you give to the poor, you give not of your own, but simply return what is his, for you have usurped that which is common and has been given for the common use of all. The land belongs to all, not to the rich; and yet those who are deprived of its use are many more than those who enjoy it. (St John Chrysostum)

pax et bonum

Article posted at 3:14pm on 26 May 2005
Category: Faith, Struggling

Wow Chrysostom was a bit of a proto-communist wasn’t he? ;)

Sven (URL)
4:16pm on 26 May 2005

Some rambling thoughts, incomplete, ill-thought out, but there we are:

1. I would be amongst the first to admit that evangelicalism in the US is in deep trouble. They adopt all kinds of whacky nonsense.

2. It is a very short quote from Ted Haggard (whoever he is!) Context could be important.

3. However, to say that these things are what an evangelical stands for, if indeed that is what the context confirms, is rubbish. Many call themselves evangelical not knowing what the the word means.

4. Nevertheless, Mr Slacktivist (good name!) is really taking liberties. Believing in free markets and property ownership is not antithetical to the simple life which can be of great benefit to the poor. Owning property doesn’t mean that you can’t give chunks of it away to bring about good. And, I really can’t see why advocating free trade should elicit the response that Mr S offered.

5. Yes you are rich compared to large parts of the human population. But really there is no point in wringing your hands over the fact that you have a computer or whatever else. Either a) give it away, or b) keep it because you need it. If b) then there is no point feeling guilt about having it. Why not rejoice that God has blessed you? It seems to me to be part of the legalistic spirit of the liberal left that on the one hand they wring their hands with guilt and the other point the finger at everyone else who is not wringing their hands!

6. Christ does not call us all to material poverty, but calls all to faithfulness, holiness, and poverty of spirit. Some are called to poverty (Rich Young Ruler). Others are blessed with riches (Abraham).

More could be said on this, but I suspect I would quickly find myself out of my depth!

Stephen () (URL)
12:49pm on 27 May 2005

Stephen,
I totally agree about context – the original doesn’t seem to be available online so I have to take slacktivist’s word that it’s fair. Which does leave Mr Haggard in some doctrinal trouble, IMO!

The issue with private property is that, for the first few centuries of the Christian church, it was seen as anti-Christian to claim something as exclusively one’s own. There is a consistent Christian witness that this world is not ours to possess but ours to share.

As for poverty, my problem is that my comfortable life depends on the grinding poverty and oppression of many other people. I try my best to spend my money ethically (fairly traded, organic, co-operatives, direct purchase and so on) but I still find myself uncomfortable about it. It’s very far from legalism – St Francis used to say rather than he was married to Lady Poverty; she was a beloved friend and companion to him, not an imposed rule. Instead, it’s natural justice that the saints were talking about in those quotes; as St Basil said in the quote above, “If one who takes the clothing off another is a thief, why give any other name to one who can clothe the naked and refuses to do so?“ Which means that I am a thief, because I have more than I absolutely need, and certainly more than many others even in this country. And so is our country, and our whole society. We are caught in an unjust system. Is it enough to try and mitigate its effects, or even to try and reform it? I hope so.

pax et bonum

[John] () (URL)
2:08pm on 27 May 2005

Even if we’re not necessarily called to asceticism, we should be convicted when confronted with poverty. Too many of us (and I include myself in this category) don’t do enough; I was humbled when one of my friends on a trip to Kenya sent an email update that talked about the poverty of the country and how one man they worked with wanted to send his intelligent daughter to high school, but it cost $150 and he had only raised $10 so far by borrowing money from relatives, savings, etc. We are so rich in comparision, even myself, “starving artist” that I am.

Dawn () (URL)
07:25am on 30 May 2005